This affects oVirt Node a bit (which is why I've got an interest) but is
also relevant to vdsm running on vanilla hypervisors like F16.

Two decisions we need to get acks on:

1. Location of local storage for vdsm is /rhev in the RHEV product.
   Suggestion is to change this to one of:

2. Naming of the management interface that vdsm uses.  Right now in
   RHEV product, vdsm renames the mgmt interface to 'rhevm'.
   Suggestions fall into a few categories (thx to danpb for putting
   these options together)

 - brN,  where N is assigned incrementally from 0. eg

               br0 containing eth0
               br1 containing eth7
               br2 containing eth42
               br4 containing vlan7.3 for VLAN 3 on eth7

 - brN,  where N is chosen based on the last digit from the
         physical interface enslaved eg

               br0 containing eth0
               br7 containing eth7
               br42 containing eth42
               br7.3 containing vlan7.3 for VLAN 3 on eth7

 - brDEV, where DEV is the name of the physical interface

               breth0 containing eth0
               breth7 containing eth7
               breth42 containing eth42
               breth7.3 containing vlan7.3 on VLAN 3 on eth7

 - brNET, where NET is a logical name of the network

               brmgmt containing eth0 as the management LAN
               brguest containing eth7 as the guest <-> guest LAN
               brinet  containing eth42 as the guest <-> internet LAN
               briscsi containing vlan7.3 for the iSCSI storage LAN

My personal vote is to use:

/opt/ovirt rather than something off of the root filesystem, since this
will fit in with how we're going to enable plugins and writable portions
of the filesystem in oVirt Node anyhow

I also vote for interface naming like brNET, so brvdsm.  Keeping in mind
that the mgmt interface will not always be a bridge in the future, so if
the mgmt interface is _not_ a bridge, then 'vdsm' by itself would be a
good name.  The br prefix should only be used if/when the vdsm interface
is also a bridge.

That's just my 2c, discuss on list and let's see if we can reach a quick
consensus so we can make fwd progress.


vdsm-devel mailing list

Reply via email to